For the Macap I'm still undecided, doser or doserless, stepped or stepless. I've read many opinions, but probably the right answer would come only after actually using one a few times.
I have used a stepped doserless Macap as well as a stepless doser version. I much preferred the latter. Stepless adjustment lends itself better for espresso grinding and the design of the doserless Macap is not ideally suited for per shot espresso grinding (whereas the doser on the Macap is very good).
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Olen käyttänyt sekä portaallista annostelijatonta Macapia että portaatonta annostelijatonta versiota. Pidin jälkimmäisestä huomattavan paljon enemmän. Portaaton säätö on mielestäni parempi espressoa varten ja Macapin annostelijaton versio ei ole parhaimmillaan jauhettaessa yhtä espressoshottia varten (kun taas Macapin annostelija on puolestaan erittäin hyvä).
After looking for a while at Rancilio Rocky, I was leaning towards doserless; Rocky has that metal thing on which it's possible to put the portafilter while grinding, which seems quite handy. On the other hand, Macap doserless doesn't have it (as I understand), which seems to be less handy. As I read somewhere, it seems better suited for eg a small shop, where the ground coffee would need to go into a bag that can be attached to the "hook" on the nozzle. Any advice for this point?
The portafilter fork that you describe can be useful, but I do not think that the lack of one is the downfall of the doserless Macap. Difficult access for cleaning, clumping of the ground coffee and the on/off switch (no portafilter activation) are in my opinion more significant issues.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Kuvaamasi haarukka kahvalle voi olla hyödyllinen, mutta mielestäni sen puute ei ole annostelijattoman Macapin ongelma. Vaikea puhdistettavuus, kahvin paakkuuntuminen ja myllyn virtakytkin (mylly ei käynnisty portafiltterin avulla) ovat mielestäni huomattavasti isompia ongelmia.
Regarding stepped vs. stepless, the argument seems to be that with stepped it's easier to change from one setting to another (faster to change, better repeatability when going back to previous seeting). On the other hand the stepless would give better control. I'm wondering how important it is in practice to have this stepless control, as probably the step in the stepped version is quite fine? Any advice? Unfortunately I don't have experience with a decent espresso machine, and no experience with grinders.
I previously owned a Rocky that has stepped adjustments and I did occasionally find myself hoping for tighter steps or stepless adjustments. However, I believe the Macap has tighter spacing of those steps. If the grinder is to be used for espresso only, I would go for the stepless version. On the other hand, if you are planning on using the grinder also for other types of coffee, I would go for the stepped (but tightly spaced) adjustment (or a Mazzer with its different type of stepless adjustment) and forget the doser version.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Omistin ennen Rockyn, jossa on portaallinen säätö ja huomasin ajoittain kaipaavani tiheämpiä portaita tai portaatonta säätöä. Ymmärtääkseni Macapissa portaat ovat kuitenkin tiheämmässä. Jos aiot käyttää myllyä vain espressojauhatukseen, niin valitsisin ehdottomasti portaattoman version. Jos puolestaan tarkoituksena on käyttää myllyä muillekin kahveille, niin valitsisin portaallisen (mutta tiuhan) säädön (tai Mazzerin, jossa on erityyppinen portaaton säätö) ja unohtaisin annostelijallisen vaihtoehdon.
T. Teme